The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-04-25
DAVIS TO BEAUREGARD.

A Caustic Response to the Generals Criti-
cism of q Recent Speech.
New Orleans Special.
General Beauregard, feeling himself aggrieved
by the remarks of Jefferson Davis, made on the
occasion of the unwilling of the statue OF Albert
Sydney Johnston in this city, on the 9th inst,
replied to them in long article in last Sundays
Picayune. In to-morrows Picayune Mr.. Davis
will publish the following statement in relation
thereto:
BEAUvoIR, Miss. April Is. 1887.
In the New Orleans Picayune of yesterday
there is a communication signed sc. T. Beaure-
gard" in which is special reference tc my re.
marks at the unveiling of the statue Of Gen.
A. Sydney Johnston. and l ask the privilege
of replying through your columns to that
portion of the communication. AS you are
aware, my remarks were unprecedented
and, under the circumstances, it would have
been very difficult if not impossible, to make
an exact report. 1t seems, however. to have
been sufficiently clear to be understood by the
writer of the communication. who undertakes to
reduce quotation to plain language. and then.
in quibbling explanation of his plain language.
shows that ne knew the true meaning of my re-
marks. If he Gid not, 1 will aid his under
standing by specially stating that,
in my opinion, the only mistake of
General Johnston in relation to the battle of
Shiloh was in not personally making the order
of march from Corinth toward Pittsburg Land
ing for which his large experience in the move
ment OF troops peculiarly qualified him, instead
of intrusting that duty to General Beauregard,
his second in command. and who had seen COM
paratively little service wi tn troops In the field
If in this way, as appears by contemporaneous
statements, day was needlessly spent on the
march, it was a mistake with serious conse
quences.
taken in supposing the telegraphic dispatch had
beer lost in which General Johnston explained
to me his plan of battle. To prove my mistake
the emphatic announcement is made: sit is not
a. t<-lS c.. ~
a declaration, that the dispatch described
by would be produced. but instead
thereof there is given dispatch recit-
ing the order of march from Corinth and
the assignment to positions in the field. and this
is offered as the telegram, now occupying our
attention." poor fulhllment of the hope sug
gested by the round assertion that the dispatch
referred to by me had not been lost In regard
to the last dispatch, | stated nothing new
in my remarks on the 9th instant.
Substantially and more fully the same
matter was published by me in 1881, in
'sRise and Fall of the Confederate Government"
Both dispatches were lost, but the one published
was supplied from the original in the possession
of Col. w. P. Johnston. 1t gave the order of
march aud general disposition of battle. The
other, as stated, was In cipher agreed upon
between General Johnston and myself, and only
used on special occasions. The original for
obvious reasons, was not therefore to be found
in his letter book.
shall not notice in detail the elfiaudation
OF the long communication under review, out
will merely say that if General Beauregard was
the author of the plan of battle: if he was pres
ent throughout with the troops who fought it; if
he was on the field when Johnston fell; if the
enemy had not then been driven from
point to point and if General Beaureg ard
throughout the whole day, before well
as after the death of General Johnston" did
| ''direct the general movements of our forces,
and did, after the fall of his chief actively press
| the attack, so that the right and center Of the
| enemy "only began to give way to confusion
| after General Beauregard had assumed com
mand,n and if the order to retire was not given
| until after attempt to make concerted
| onslaught had been made but as he states
''was desultory, without spirit or order. and
failed in effect" and if it not until just before
sunset that be ordered a cessation of hostllites
then many witnesses of good repute have
I greatly misstated the important facts in regard
| to the battle of Shiloh, and especially as to how
a victory was well nigh won and how it was for
feised Mere assertion will not rebut that mas
| of weighty evidence which has been ado uced
| l have no disposition to enter into the contro
versv, and did not mention General Beauregart
either by name. official designation in n.
remarks on the 9th inst He undertook Z
| make plain, a reference to himself wha
might have been generally supposed to belong
| to some staff officer. but he knew the rightfu
! owner, and claimed his own, and proved tina